Reuters Cites Wisconsin's 'Permissive Gun Laws' in Connection With the Sikh Temple Massacre

Wade Michael Page, the Army veteran identified as the gunman who killed six people at a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin, yesterday, reportedly was armed with a legally purchased 9mm pistol. Not much for gun controllers to work with there: The gun would not qualify as an "assault weapon," and it's not even clear that Page's "multiple ammunition magazines" held more than 10 rounds each. (Even if they did, he apparently had no problem swapping them.) Reuters does the best it can with this material:

Authorities said the gunman had used a 9mm semi-automatic pistol, which was recovered at the scene. They were trying to track the origin of the weapon.

Wisconsin has some of the most permissive gun laws in the country. It passed a law in 2011 allowing citizens to carry a concealed weapon.

Thirty-nine states have nondiscretionary carry permit laws, meaning people can get one if they meet a few objective criteria (generally including a clean record and some sort of training), while in three other states (Alaska, Arizona, and Vermont) people can carry concealed handguns without a permit. So Wisconsin is hardly unusual in this respect and was actually late to the trend. More to the point, a man bent on mass murder is not likely to be deterred by the fact that carrying his gun to the site of the attack is illegal.

In contrast with Reuters, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence has been uncharacteristically cautious so far, seizing on the temple massacre as yet another reason to sign a monumentally vague petition asking politicians to "do something about the toll of gun violence on our nation." The petition tries to reassure the wary by saying "it is time we acknowledged" that "the Second Amendment to the constitution guarantees the right to keep and bear arms." Having done that, we need to "put aside partisan politics and look for solutions that will save lives." See how simple?

Addendum: The Guardian, like Reuters, says Wisconsin "has some of the most permissive gun laws in the country," noting that "last year it passed a law allowing citizens to carry a concealed weapon." CBS, however, reports that "Page did not have the additional permit needed to legally carry a concealed weapon"—which shows he could not possibly have committed this crime.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • RBS||

    Do something! Anything!

  • wareagle||

    if only there were better gun laws, then the urge to murder would be eliminated. Because there is absolutely no other way in which one person can kill another. And because there is absolutely no component of human behavior - normal or erratic - that cannot be regulated through passage of a law.

  • Suki||

    Don't stop there. We need to outlaw murder too.

  • Hugh Akston||

    I look forward to someone, somewhere, blaming this on Scott Walker and his union-busting pinkertons.

  • Randian||

  • Randian||

  • ||

    Yeah, but the impotent bitterness of the idiots in the comments section is kind of refreshing, they still haven't gotten over the fact that they lost big in Wisconsin.

  • Question of Auban||

    This is a horrible tragedy,every Sikh I have ever met has been a wonderful person.

    I found this snipit of news interesting: "While in the Army Wade served as a sergeant, and later as a specialist based in Ft. Bliss in Texas and at Ft. Bragg in North Carolina. Wade's job was as a Hawk missile system repairman, and he then became a psychological operations specialist, defense official confirmed to ABC news."

    http://gma.yahoo.com/sikh-temp.....ories.html

    I remember that the guy who is a suspect in the theater shooting was also involved in the field of psychology somehow ....

  • Pro Libertate||

    It's just so weird. Why Sikhs? If the shooter were in psych ops, one would think he'd know the difference between Sikhs and Muslims, so a conflation of the two seems unlikely. Probably just the crazy striking again, which defies explanation. That, or it's Sarah Palin again.

  • ||

    Palin probably has a Sikh somewhere in an old campaign photo on her online photo gallery. This is clear evidence of Teabagger insurrectionism leading to massacres.

    BAN THE TEA PARTY.

  • RBS||

    But Nikki Haley used to be the darling of the SC Tea Party and she's a Sikh.

  • ||

    I should have added /sarcasm tags. Sorry.

  • RBS||

    I knew you were being sarcastic. But I'm sure someone somewhere will make that argument seriously, so I was just pointing out that it's retarded.

  • ||

    I'm willing to bet money that some media outfit (or ten) are seriously going to try spinning this as another teabagger outcome.

    You can't write that shit. Only in reality can people be this retarded.

  • wareagle||

    cue Napolitano: "and people laughed when our report listed former military members as potential terrorists."

  • RBS||

    Well, I was right.

    Via Facebook:

    The Tea Party, the GOP, Rush Limbaugh and his ilk, all contributed to atmosphere that generated the horrible anti-Sikh shooting which the Westboro Baptist Church thinks is God's work. Heaven help us from these folks.
  • ||

    I keep getting the Westboro Baptist Church confused with the Landover Baptist Church.

  • Randian||

    This is what happens when everyone's sarcastic but ironically earnest at the same time: No one has any idea what the hell the others actually believe.

  • Question of Auban||

    "This is what happens when everyone's sarcastic but ironically earnest at the same time: No one has any idea what the hell the others actually believe."

    Exactly, the first time I read about the Westboro Baptit Church I thought it was a parody, and a bad one at that. I thought it was an over-the-top gag.

  • Question of Auban||

    Sorry, left out an S in Baptist.

  • Question of Auban||

    If one accepts the mainstream news at face value, and if he is a racist, this may have more to do with their race (using the definition of race used by the ignorant) than their religion. He might be the type of person more likely to kill a black Christian than a Muslim who is of “white North-European heritage”.

  • Suki||

    Religious bigotry is racism now too, unless it is directed at Christians.

  • ||

    Why Sikhs? If the shooter were in psych ops, one would think he'd know the difference between Sikhs and Muslims, so a conflation of the two seems unlikely.

    That's why I'm thinking it's something personal. Maybe he was a neighbor of one of the Sikhs and they yelled at him for letting his dog poop in their yard or something.

  • Drake||

    Are they dismissing the possibility he had a beef with somebody there? I know it's old fashioned to shoot people just because you dislike them as individuals.

  • Pip||

    The guy was a neo-Nazi (no Godwin). He was a white supremacist. Sikhs tend to be non-white.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Just randomly grabbed some nonwhites? I suppose that's possible. Maybe even likely. He's another wacko, for sure.

  • John||

    Pro it can't be that he is just another wacko. It can't be. No, there must be a way for this to confirm our prejudices and blame our political enemies. There just must.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Well, okay, then it's another nonlibertarian killer? Say, they're all nonlibertarians, aren't they?

  • BakedPenguin||

    No, no. I'm sure they'll say he was anti-government, which is the worst thing ever. A neo-Nazi who hates the government because he thinks it's controlled by Jews is exactly the same as a libertarian who hates the government because it violates the rights of its citizens.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Anti-government doesn't mean what they think it means.

  • wareagle||

    and if that was the motivation, let's look at one other glaringly obvious detail: the target was a place where a large number of people could be expected to congregate, and there is also a high expectation that no one would be armed.

  • Suki||

    I just want to know what kind of government approved and certified as perfectly safe drugs he was on, and what government approved and certified doctor gave him a note to pick them up at the government approved and certified drug store.

  • Whiterun Guard||

    A "psychological operations specialist", particularly around the E4-E6 level is so far removed from "the field of psychology" it's laughable.

    Although to be honest, the Colorado guy was pretty freaking far away from "the field of psychology" as well.

    Maybe that's it. We should be on the lookout for anyone tangentially acquainted at some point in their lives with Nueroscience! GET THE TRAINS READY!

  • Question of Auban||

    Interesting, so what exactly is the job of a "psychological operations specialist"? I am not saying you are wrong, just trying to understand the differences.

    Thanks

  • John||

    It is more "battlefield propaganda specialist."

  • Question of Auban||

    Ahh, I see, it is newspeak then. Like "home making" was renamed "Home Economics".

  • Suki||

    It is Human Ecology last time I looked.

  • ||

    t is more "battlefield propaganda specialist."

    So he was a military copywriter?
    Or was he involved with the actual delivery of those little leaflets (in which case he'd be the military equivalent of a paper boy)?

  • wareagle||

    psy-ops is not psychiatry. It's dropping in leaflets over countries encouraging the populace to rise up or trying to understand how they think. Think of a marketing department within the armed forces.

  • Question of Auban||

    Thanks

  • BakedPenguin||

    "Have you ever thought about the benefits of unconditional surrender?"

  • Whiterun Guard||

    At the Sgt. Level it would be someone who schedules pre-made radio broadcasts, edits flyers or something like that.

    Basically a Public Affairs Specialist with a security clearance.

  • Question of Auban||

    Thanks

  • ||

    ...someone who schedules pre-made radio broadcasts, edits flyers or something like that.

    I do similar work in the private sector, but we call it marketing.

  • Randian||

    Psychological operations in the Army is not really psychological. It's just a fancy term for marketing + propaganda.

  • Drake||

    And judging from his discharge, he wasn't capable of doing that job right.

  • ||

    Don't these criminals know that killing people is illegal?

  • Question of Auban||

    I know exactly what we nee to do, we need to have the Federal Government start a "War on Murder" and we need Obama to appoint a "Murder Tzar". That will solve this problem once and for all!

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Murder murder!

  • Whiterun Guard||

    Pfft, if you outlaw murder, only outlaws will commit murder.

  • Brett L||

    Just to clarify, the Murder Tzar will be fighting a War on Murder, not approving drone strikes, right?

  • Question of Auban||

    Well, drone strikes will be an important tool in the "War on Murder". Just like the Federal Government protected innocent children in the Branch Dividian Waco compound by killing them, the Federal Government will now be protecting victims of ALL violence (except government violence) by killing them.

  • Brett L||

    Ah. Brilliant.

  • Question of Auban||

    Thanks :)

  • Being Waterboarded||

    This inane commentary below was posted to a faculty listserve at Texas AM University by a fellow faculty member. And us faculty wonder why the public doesn't like us much...

    "Some tentative thoughts on yet another mass murder:

    Unconfirmed rumors thus far: white, 30's, using a semiautomatic handgun (illegal between 1994-2004), with a 9/11 tattoo. If you want one and only one argument for why the humanities might be important, it's this: who else will teach you comparative religion? or inform you that turban-wearing men are probably members of one of the most peaceful and egalitarian religions in the world?

    What we know for certain: 1) A Christian leader will explain that he's sorry that the Sikhs are in hell, 2) He will probably say it's because Sikhs believe in science (evolution), 3) The NRA will deny responsibility, 4) Michele Bachmann will deny responsibility for her campaign of incitement against Muslims, 5) There will be no serious debate about gun restrictions, 6) We will coalesce around some "pray for the victims and let's not politicize another tragedy" theme.

    America, per Tony Kushner in Angels in America: Terminal, crazy, and mean."

  • Being Waterboarded||

    Good thing his thoughts are "tentative"!

  • RBS||

    Wow, someone needs to turn off MSNBC and take a few deep breaths.

  • Whiterun Guard||

    Wow, if only we could go back to 2004, when no one ever died of 'semi-automatic handguns' because they were 'illegal'.

    Those really were the salad days.

  • ||

    The retardation is uncommonly strong with this one.

  • wareagle||

    well, he is a department head.

  • Brett L||

    You'd think someone at A ampersand M would have had plenty of opportunities to interact with a large number of white male current and former military members who own more than one firearm and not look at them as a uniform block. Also, I'd think that College Station is still conservative enough for this to earn a reprimand from the Dean and/or President.

  • ||

    Nice Cassandra complex there.

  • John||

    using a semiautomatic handgun (illegal between 1994-2004),

    Good thing this guy knows a lot about weapons and weapons law.

    why the humanities might be important, it's this: who else will teach you comparative religion? or inform you that turban-wearing men are probably members of one of the most peaceful and egalitarian religions in the world?

    If only he had had a liberal arts degree, he would have known to kill Muslims and not Sikhs.

  • R C Dean||

    I quit right about here:

    using a semiautomatic handgun (illegal between 1994-2004)

    Anybody that uninformed about a topic is not worth reading, period.

  • perlhaqr||

    I couldn't stop. It was like watching a train full of pop rocks collide with a tanker of diet coke.

  • Cdr Lytton||

    Now THAT I'd like to see.

  • Suki||

    +1

  • ||

    Wisconsin has some of the most permissive car laws in the country. We must ban cars. Cars kill people.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    And once again, the shooter chose a venue with victims he could easily assume were not armed. The shooter was apparently a Nazi skinhead, yet he chose not to start the Race War at say, the Black Panther HQ in Oakland, or a Habonim Dror summer camp.

  • Whiterun Guard||

    Don't Sikhs have knives in their hats? Or is that urban legend or something.

    Apparently they're not throwing knives.

  • ||

    every sikh i have encountered has worn one around their neck.

    and btw, statistically speaking, sikhs are a lot like mormons. disparately UNlikely to be crime offenders

    i think traditionally they might have worn them on their hips, but at least in the US, everytime i have dealt with a sikh who had one of those ceremonial knives (at least that i know of), it was around the neck.

    most of the time, they were tiny little things. again, it's a ceremonial, symbolic thing i think in modern society

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Yeah, I have worked with a few Sikhs in the past. They are really genuinely nice and gentle people. They wouldn't harm a fly. They wear small, symbolic knives in the US. Because if your average soccer mom saw a brown man, with a big beard, a turbin and a 3 foot crescent sword in his waistband walking down the street she would call the cops. Then Dunphy would have to shoot the poor guy.

    /kidding Dunphy

  • ||

    I've seen Sikhs carry sizable knives on their waistbands in the US, but never swords. Of course, I don't live in a blue fortress, so nobody called 911.

  • ||

    no problem, man. i smiled.

    fwiw, i HAVE dealt with a few guys actually walking down the street with a sword.

    AS LONG AS it's sheathed, it's perfectly legal.

    if the guy is swinging it around, etc. that would be a crime.

    see the link here for SPD's very successful disarming of a man with a sword.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....ults_video

    note the video commentary is incorrect. it's not downtown LA, it's seattle.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Yeah, there was a nutter in Columbus, OH back in 1988 that was running around downtown with a sword. He was shot.

  • The Hammer||

    I read through this comment like 5 times, and I still can't tell if "sword" is a euphemism.

  • Brandybuck||

    A guy in kilt once tried to hack his way into my neighbor's apartment with a claymore. Thankfully SWAT showed up five hours later...

  • Randian||

    I always think of the mine rather than the sword when I hear claymore.

  • ||

    i think sword is definitely a male reference

    (unless she is a heavy user of AAS in which case - clitoremegalomy(sp?))

    claymore is definitely a female

    i think i'll actually use that one

    "man, that chick has one hauna punani. it's a fucking claymore!"

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Apparently they're not throwing knives.

    Too soon, man.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Sikh men carry kirpans, which are traditionally curved swords from 1-3' long. But in countries where Sikhs are less common and more likely to be randomly selected for additional screening, they can carry small daggers or even just necklaces with dulled dagger charms.

    All of which, of course, are still impossible to get through airport security.

  • ||

    yea, like i said, i've dealt with sikhs on many many occasions, and almost always, the men wear them in necklaces around their neck. i've seen knives that are purely ceremonial(dulled blade) as well as ones with real blades an inch or two or three long worn.

    and again, statistically speaking, sikhs are VERY law abiding. i'd rather deal with a sikh with 20 knives or guns than a spracker with a sharp stick

  • T||

    Umm, what's a spracker?

  • ||

    meth-addict

    we have a local crew of meth addict burglar/thieves who are VERY prolific criminals.

    the thing about meth heads is that most are relatively non violent, like most people

    but they are also hyper paranoid, and sometimes completely out of their head, such that they can do some very unpredictable shit and when cornered CAN get very violent.

    they just tend to be very irrational.

    i prefer to deal with rational people. even if violent, rational people can usually be talked down into compliance.

    unless they are hell bent on suicide by cop or whatever.

    the other day, a homeowner caught some spracker burglarizing his garage. he held her at gunpoint and what was funny was SHE also called 911 and asked us to hurry up as she was afraid the homeowner was going to shoot her.

  • Solanum||

    the other day, a homeowner caught some spracker burglarizing his garage. he held her at gunpoint and what was funny was SHE also called 911 and asked us to hurry up as she was afraid the homeowner was going to shoot her.

    Did that make national news? I'm sure someone posted a similar story in the morning links last week.

  • ||

    i highly doubt it, but it could be. this occurred in the greater seattle metro area, which is about as specific as i can be (i am not super stoked on outing which agency i am with, although it's not THAT big of a deal).

  • perlhaqr||

    I thought those guys were called tweakers.

  • ||

    that's another word.

    tweaker, spracker, batuna ( term we used in hawaii, a pidgin mishmash of "batu" which is filipino for rock and "tuna" since it was a chick. like a young girl who gets addicted to meth and starts whoring herself out is a batuna), ice-head

  • Suki||

    The Southern Poverty Law Center says this Nazi is a in a "Right Wing" punk band and they say that the Black Panthers are a "Right Wing hate group" too. They never attack each other, you see.

  • ||

    omg, the pearl clutching.

    PERMISSIVE gun laws? you mean the same laws that have been correlated over the last few decades with DROPPING crime rates, to include part I and part II crimes?

    (note i said correlated. i'm not stating a causal connection, but clearly far MORE permissive gun laws have not SPIKED crime rates)

    fuck reuters.

    and fwiw, we have hundreds of millions of guns in civilian (including cops and noncops) hands. even if we passed draconian and unconstitutional laws banning same, CRIMINALS would still have ready access to same.

  • ||

    (note i said correlated. i'm not stating a causal connection, but clearly far MORE permissive gun laws have not SPIKED crime rates)

    ---------------

    Both are appropriate. The general rule is more guns = less crime.

    Authoritarian jizzstains don't seem to give a shit. Maybe they'd be happier in, say, Austria, or England, where the rates violent crime make DC look like a safe haven.

    Fucking hoplophobes.

  • ||

    *whose rates of violent crime

  • ||

    yes. i agree with the premise that more guns = less crime, but it's harder to PROVE.

    what *is* irrefutable is that in the US, during a MASSIVE increase in access to guns, including over a dozen states moving to shall issue vs. "may issue", crime rates dropped

    and EVERY prediction of anti-gunners was wrong. there was no blood in the streets

    people WITH CCW's are amongst the MOST law abiding of demographics (especially when correlating with the fact that most are men, who are of course more likely to commit cimes than women)

    as a cop, when i pull somebody over and they tell me "hey, i'm armed and i have a ccw and a gun on my hip", that puts me AT EASE.

    because i make my decisions based on data and real world experience, not fear of GUNZ OH NOES.

    i did have to assist a trooper the other day with a guy who came REALLY close to getting shot when he kept reaching for his unholstered gun in the center console during a traffic stop.

    we ended up arresting him. the only charges applicable were DUI and carrying concealed without a permit (both misdemeanors)

    under WA law, a loaded gun in a car is considered "concealed" and you must have a permit. you can carry openly on your person without a permit, or concealed with one.

    i've responded to a couple of dozen calls where armed people detained criminals (burglars, bombers, car thieves) etc. at gunpoint. in only one did they have to fire.

  • ||

    sadly, one of my friends was killed by a deranged EDP naked and high on crack. two "civilians" had concealed weapons at the scene.

    the first did not fire because she thought she did not have a proper backstop (apartment building about a 1/4 mile beyond her target. she would have been justified imo).

    the second saw that the suspect's gun was empty (slide locked back) by the time he got in position and had his gun out.

    he would have been justified as well, certainly, if he gave an order to stop (the man walked off with the unloaded gun)

    either way, armed citizens are a blessing to law enforcement (not felons and scumbags, but ordinary folks ) imo and ime

  • perlhaqr||

    Wait, so you can open carry on your hip, but if you get into a car it's now concealed?

    That may be one of the more retarded firearm carry laws I've heard of out of a state that isn't a total anti-gun hellhole. (Like IL.)

  • ||

    yes. basically, you do not need a permit to

    1) carry openly (a car is not considered OPENLY which KIND of makes sense, since it IS concealed from public view i guess)

    2) carry concealed at your "abode' or "fixed place of business" iow store clerk etc. can carry concealed at work w/o a permit.

    fwiw, a lot of questions about what ABODE means since of course the RCW doesn't define it, just throws it in the statute and leaves it to cops and lawyers to figure out through arrests and court motions (which is typical of careless legislation)

    from what a prosecutor told me based on case law - front porch is still abode, yard isn't, garage is probably abode IF it's attached, etc. it takes case law to flesh this shit out

  • wareagle||

    there you go again, confusing the issue with facts that defy the narrative. There a re-education camp-bound bus with a seat for you.

  • ||

    im always willing to change my mind based on facts/experience

    when i started as a cop i was PRO drug war (at least for "hard drugs") and anticoncealed carry

    my experience as cop and firefighter, as well as data that was presented by intelligent discussion mates online made me change my mind

    growing up in a liberal east coast city, like many people, the idea of people just carrying guns struck me as "bizarre" and ";dangerous"

  • ||

    you mean the same laws that have been correlated over the last few decades with DROPPING crime rates, to include part I and part II crimes?

    Don't you know the rules? Correlation only means causation when talking about global warming.

  • NoVAHockey||

    9mm handgun? somebody better tell the post, which is reporting: "Police said the gunman entered the temple and sprayed automatic-weapon fire, killing four people inside the building and two more outside."

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....ml?hpid=z1

  • ||

    Your lack of knowledge is staggering, libertard. A 9mm handgun, otherwise known as a streetsweeper assault handcannon negro-killing race-war machine, fires auto-super-matic fire at a rate of 10,000 bullets per second from the high-capacity clip.

    THIS IS WHY THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS OUTDATED.

  • Pip||

    When I bought my 9mm, I sprung for the upgrade and got the one that fires 20,000 bullets per second. I felt it was worth the extra twelve dollars.

  • ||

    Reminds me of the Metal Storm weapons systems that were developed to fire stacked, electronically triggered munitions at a cyclic rate of up to 1 million rounds a minute. If I'm not mistaken, they did develop a 9mm handgun version with 4 barrels and a rate of fire of more than 250,000 round a minute (but it could only hold 4 rounds per barrel).

  • RBS||

    9mm doesn't have the same terror inducing imagery of "sprayed automatic-weapon fire"

  • John||

    I love how this is immediately classified as "domestic terrorism" yet a Muslim major blows a fuse and kills 30 soldiers for the jihad and that to this day has not been considered "terrorism". And to add insult to injury, Hussein's act was not an act of domestic terrorism. But one of the reasons given for drone striking Al Awacki was because he allegedly inspired Hussein to do what he did.

  • kinnath||

    POTUS has a big picture hanging on his bathroom wall that all stories must reflect.

  • ||

    "Domestic terrorism" means a white guy killing people because he's racist or hates the government. And those things are equivalent, really.

  • R C Dean||

    I know, John. I believe the Ft. Hood shooting is officially classified as
    "workplace violence."

  • Paul.||

    Maybe if Wade had been a janitor at the temple we could call it "workplace violence".

  • Paul.||

    Hmm.

    Dear Reason,

    My comment posted, but I got an assload of PHP errors related to a MySQL issue. Fyi.

  • Hugh Akston||

    My stepdad has to take MySQL every day for his PHP.

  • ||

    "

    I love how this is immediately classified as "domestic terrorism" yet a Muslim major blows a fuse and kills 30 soldiers for the jihad and that to this day has not been considered "terrorism". And to add insult to injury, Hussein's act was not an act of domestic terrorism. But one of the reasons given for drone striking Al Awacki was because he allegedly inspired Hussein to do what he did."
    Shorter John: I will never give up my bigotry. Never, ever, ever.

  • RBS||

    This is probably the dumbest comment of the day.

  • Suki||

    Hasan did not "blow a fuse," he was carrying out his long-range career plan.

  • Loki||

    Wisconsin has some of the most permissive gun laws in the country. It passed a law in 2011 allowing citizens to carry a concealed weapon.

    Which has fuck all to with the story. I fucking hate it when reporters put irrelevant information in the story just to gin up an emotional knee jerk reaction in the readers. They do this shit all the time.

    The petition tries to reassure the wary by saying "it is time we acknowledged" that "the Second Amendment to the constitution guarantees the right to keep and bear arms." Having done that, we need to "put aside partisan politics and look for solutions that will save lives."

    Here's a solution: pass a law mandating the purchase of at least one handgun or pay a penaltax. Easy peasy.

  • Question of Auban||

    "Here's a solution: pass a law mandating the purchase of at least one handgun or pay a penaltax. Easy peasy."

    Good idea! Once passed on the state level it could become a model for a Federal Law! Then the governor who signed it into law on the state level could get a party's nomination for President and then complain vigorously about the federal law that was based upon the state law he signed! This is the way things now work in America.

  • Paul.||

    Wisconsin has some of the most permissive gun laws in the country. It passed a law in 2011 allowing citizens to carry a concealed weapon.

    Was Wade's weapons concealed?

  • T||

    So, 40-yo tattooed ex-soldier who listened to metal and used to be stationed at Ft. Bragg?

    Well, that's about half of my age cohort that was in the 82d with me. I presume we should all report to the camp if we own a handgun?

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    The shooter was a Nazi skinhead.

  • Brett L||

    So only the white guys need to show up.

  • John||

    Yes. As a member of the 82nd, you were a member of an extremist organization.

  • R C Dean||

    With a history of violence!

  • John||

    And alcoholism.

  • John||

    But this story gives Dave Weigel a chance to show was a worthless ignorant douche bag he is.

    Here is repeats the Southern Poverty Law Center's allegations the shooter listened to "racist bands"

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/wei.....bands.html

    The charge comes as a hell of a surprise to said bands

    http://althouse.blogspot.com/2.....pathy.html

    How did Weigel ever get a job as Reason? Was he the idiot son of a donor? Did he have embarrassing pictures of the Jacket?

  • Paul.||

    There are no embarrassing pictures of The Jacket. All pictures of the Jacket serve to increase the mythic reputation of The Jacket. What would be embarrassing to you or me would only make The Jacket even more cool.

  • R C Dean||

    "The Most Interesting Jacket in the World . . . "

  • ||

    he doesn't use THE FORCE, he just uses force - Boba Fett *is* the most interesting bounty hunter in the galaxy

  • Randian||

    Er, it looks to me like Weigel is right. I mean, he provided the actual songs and lyrics, John.

  • John||

    And the band says it has never been associated with White supremacy and the lyrics are a sad commentary on our sick society and the problems that prevent true progress, according to their MySpace page.

    They lyrics are supposed to be ironic not literal.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Sorry John. The band was Nazi skinhead. I checked out the label/ distro website. Don't go too far defending this. He was a Nazi skinhead, as was his band.

  • John||

    The band seems to be denying it. And their myspace page seems to agree. I am trusting that over SPLC.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Here is the link to their label/distro.

    http://www.label56.com/categor.....tics-blog/

    It is called Label 56. Maybe the band wasn't specifically Nazi, but their label is involved with White Nationalism, American Third Position, and other types of that bullshit. Please look for yourself. I don't think you want to be on the side defending this shithead. Trust me.

  • John||

    I am not defending the shit head who did it.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    I am not defending the shit head who did it.

    You are right. My logic fail. What I meant to say is that Weigel is right. So cut him some slack on this one. But only this one. Bust his balls every chance you get.

  • ||

    American Third Position

    DICK HOSTE!!!

  • ||

    kind of like steve earle's song written from the perspective of john walker - john walker's blues

    just because you write a song from a certain perspective, or a book for that matter does not mean you support that.

    that's just BASIC shit and i can't stand all the hysteria

    does anybody think that when the police did the song murder by numbers, which explains how to become a murderer, and that after the first kill, it gets easier, etc. - that the police were advocating that people become serial murderers?

    don't get me wrong, i think steve earle has some fucked up politics (however, he's a brilliant musician. much like rage against the machine. dumb politics. great music.) but i don't think he thought was john walker lindh did was GOOD. he merely tried to write a song FROM the kid's perspective.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    just because you write a song from a certain perspective, or a book for that matter does not mean you support that.

    In this case, despite what their myspace page says, the band was in fact a Nazi skinhead band.

  • ||

    fair enuf. i have no personal knowledge either way

    i'm just sayin' when spinal tap was going to so saucy jack, it didn't mean they supported jack the ripper'ing

    otoh, they advocated sniffing the glove

  • Suki||

    SLPC says they are "Right Wing" too. How are socialists ever Right Wing anyway?

  • Suki||

    Here is repeats the Southern Poverty Law Center's allegations the shooter listened to "racist bands"

    Presumably he did some listening as he sang for them too.

  • Paul.||

    Hey legal eagles, I have a technical question on the lore.

    I just read that Loughner is going to be judged "competent to stand trial".

    This is, apparently, after a long effort to make him competent to stand trial.

    If the perpetrator of a crime isn't competent to stand trial upon his arrest, doesn't that suggest that he could be found innocent on grounds of insanity? If he's made competent over time by giving him anti-psychotic medication- even forcefully (in Loughner's case), hasn't his state of mind then been changed ex post facto and now has nothing to with his state of mind at the time of the crime? Isn't that kind of-- I hesitate to say it-- unfair to the defendant?

  • John||

    Just because he is competent to stand trial does not mean he can't also be not guilty by reason of insanity.

  • R C Dean||

    Two different standards. Plus, one applies when the crime was committed, and the other at trial.

  • ||

    Given how heinous his crimes were, I find it difficult to make this point, but it seems to me that the state mental hospital pumped Loughner full of drugs to make him sane enough to stand trial. At which point he agreed to plead guilty. I think that raises the issue of whether or not a person heavily influenced by drugs is in a position to plead to charges.

  • ||

    I'm getting the impression that that's why there's to be a fairly substantial hearing over his guilty plea.

    It should nrmally be fairly routine but the judge will want to establish that he's actually able to understand what his plea means and that he understands what he's pleading to.

    The defence seems to think this is the best deal they're going to get. There never was a question of him being aquitted. The best he could hope for is avoiding the death penalty.

  • ||

    right. i don't think there's any doubt about it.

    basically, in cases where it's clear as fuck THE DOOD DID it, you have a # of options

    insanity

    victim of society (the repo man sushi defense)

    he's guilty as fuck, but the cops suck and this is your chance to get back at them, plus chewbacca! (the oj defense)

  • ||

    IIRC, the defence attorney in this case was selected specifically to because she specializes in trying to avoid the death penalty rather than gain an outright aquittal.

    If the plea goes through she will have succeeded.

  • Loki||

    Not a legal eagle myself, but if I had to guess, they want to to be "competent to stand trial" so that if they find him guilty he'll know what's happening and why he has to go spend the rest of his life in a cramped cell with a big dude named Bubba who's intent on making him his bride. IOW, they don't want to have someone who is still too bat shit crazy to comprehend what's going on around him to be sent to prison.

    He can still be found not guilty by reason of insanity or even sentenced to life in a mental institution because of his mental state at the time of the crime, and the fact that he'll probably need anti-psychotic meds for the rest of his life to keep from going to back to being bat shit crazy.

  • RBS||

    Pretty much, that and you're supposed to be able to help with your defense.

  • Paul.||

    Ok, thanks for the responses.

    What's the standard, though?

    What I mean by that is, how long are they allowed to "make him competent" to stand trial before they give up? Do they set the date for the hearing and then use that as a deadline? Or do they just keep attempting to make him competent and then when they finally can, do they then set the hearing date?

    I guess I'm just curious as to how long they can keep attempting to bring him to competency before they give up?

    Or am I asking the wrong questions?

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    Well, they've got to set up one of the main bullshit arguments that anti-gunners always roll out, the "nobody needs" argument. No matter what kind of gun it was, nobody needs one of those. And if you don't believe it, someone surrounded by heavily armed bodyguards 24/7 (usually provided by the taxpayers) will explain it to you.

  • Randian||

    Goddammit reason your new fucking site ate another comment in a blast of PHP errors and time-outs.

  • Old Mexican||

    "Authorities said the slingman had used a round river rock and sling, which was recovered at the scene. They were trying to track the origin of the weapon.

    Judea has some of the most permissive sling laws in the country. It passed a law in 1500 allowing citizens to carry a concealed sling."

    As Reuters would've described the slaying of Goliath. And I am sure it would insinuate that slings should be banned if one had been used to shoot rocks at the Sikhs.

  • ||

    lol

    awesome

    fwiw, you may (not) be surprised but in some jurisdiction, slingshots ARE illegal to carry in public

  • ||

    Sure they don't mean a slungshot?

    They were also known as "slingshots," but had nothing to do with what is now known as a slingshot. Many jurisdictions' laws against "slingshots" were actually meant to refer to slungshots.

    Florida's concealed weapons law actually uses "slungshot". I found it confusing until I found the definition of a "slungshot" was different from what I knew as a "slingshot".

  • ||

    that's nifty. i did not know that.

  • ||

    IIRC, under Florida's law a sock partly filled with sand and knotted or tied would be considered a slugshot.

    It's basically anything non-rigid that can be swung and used to strike a victim.

  • ||

    hey, mine is RIGID AS FUCK!!!

    (just sayin...)

  • Drake||

    Every noob knows that creek stone's are way more accurate and reliable. Surprised he hit anything with that piece of shit.

  • Zair||

    while in three other states (Alaska, Arizona, and Vermont) people can carry concealed handguns without a permit

    Four states, actually. Wyoming as well.

  • Brendan||

    Hopefully it's not "too soon", but I'd like to that this guy didn't build that gun.

    He went to school, probably learned stuff there, drove on roads, maybe some bridges, we know that the gun was shipped via truck on some roads, the FBI or State DPS/police might have done a background check on him, firefighter probably had to inspect his residence as well as the gun store.

    In short, it wasn't his lack of respect for life, insanity, or deranged mind that built this massacre, it was all of us working together.

  • Brendan||

    Fuck fuck fuck.

    but I'd like to point out that this guy didn't build that gun.


    [I didn't screw that post up-teachers, schools, roads, all of us working together, etc.]

  • LarryA||

    Wisconsin has some of the most permissive gun laws in the country.

    Well, sort of. There are nine states that have less gun law. Wisconsin has 3 Brady points, tied with Florida.
    Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Montana, North Dakota, and Oklahoma have 2 points each. Alaska, Arizona, and Utah have 0 points each.
    http://www.bradycampaign.org/x.....nkings.pdf

  • jason||

    This massacre just happen after the batman incident and the thing is gun control debate is on fire in this time period, we hope it will get success.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement